Jillian brockhouse IT WAS Diana Smith who first asked the question about due process. After the election, measures went forward with breathtaking speed, if not indecent haste. The measured tread of government is to reassure people, especially at times of change.
Fred Hopwood wrote the next week about the structure and mechanisms that underlie the present system of cuts. Joseph Stiglitz has objected to measures like this before, but, as now, his colleagues were not prepared to listen to his good sense. As taxpayers had funded the banks, why didn’t they help a little more towards repayment of the deficit? More could be done about offshore accounts that provide “tax efficiency” for a plutocracy of mounting wealth and shrinking numbers.
This week we have Michael Davey’s letter, which evokes a feeling of deja vu. Last time, measures were wrapped in the Economic Miracle package.
Enthusiasm and greed were seen as acceptable, while growing numbers within the population felt the pain of this. That government stayed in a long time, and the philosophy behind the miracle did harm to people, and through them, to other things that cannot be dealt with by the resulting economic philosophy that we have now.
On July 1 we had a letter from Roger Oldfield, giving temperatures for Pakistan and southern Europe, warning about the Atlantic hurricane season and saying that Lake Tanganyika is now at its warmest in 1,500 years. Please remember that the economy is a subset of the environment. John Donne rules here.
Over a year ago now, Susan George said: “The financial crisis is a huge challenge, but we can go back and fix it. You can’t do that with nature. If nature is going off the track then it’s off the track, and humans have absolutely nothing to say about that.” The dog has seen the rabbit, but it’s the wrong rabbit.
Stafford
